Thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) is an important clinical marker in the diagnosis and management of thyroid disease. TSH measurements are reported in milli-International Units per Litre (mIU/L), traceable to a World Health Organisation (WHO) reference material. There is a wide variety of commercial immunoassays for TSH measurements available, which have historically been poorly harmonised due to a lack of commutability of the WHO reference materials with patient samples. This led to the recent development of a serum-based reference panel for TSH, traceable to the WHO reference material, available via the International Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC), aimed at harmonisation of TSH immunoassays. This report describes recent developments in the TSH reference system, including establishment of the 4th WHO International Standard for TSH, and aims to clarify the relationship between the available reference materials and their intended uses. This 4th WHO IS is widely available and defines the unit of TSH activity, therefore its continued existence is of paramount importance, however it continues to show a lack of commutability with patient in many TSH immunoassays. This makes the C-STFT TSH panel, albeit available in restricted numbers, a critical resource to ensure better TSH assay harmonisation.

It is important for external quality assessment materials (EQAMs) to be commutable with clinical samples; i.e., they should behave like clinical samples when measured using end-user clinical laboratory in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVD-MDs). Using commutable EQAMs makes it possible to evaluate metrological traceability and/or equivalence of results between IVD-MDs. The criterion for assessing commutability of an EQAM between 2 IVD-MDs is that its result should be within the prediction interval limits based on the statistical distribution of the clinical sample results from the 2 IVD-MDs being compared. The width of the prediction interval is, among other things, dependent on the analytical performance characteristics of the IVD-MDs. A presupposition for using this criterion is that the differences in nonselectivity between the 2 IVD-MDs being compared are acceptable. An acceptable difference in nonselectivity should be small relative to the analytical performance specifications used in the external quality assessment scheme. The acceptable difference in nonselectivity is used to modify the prediction interval criterion for commutability assessment. The present report provides recommendations on how to establish a criterion for acceptable commutability for EQAMS, establish the difference in nonselectivity that can be accepted between IVD-MDs, and perform a commutability assessment. The report also contains examples for performing a commutability assessment of EQAMs.

A secondary higher-order calibrator is required to be commutable with clinical samples to be suitable for use in the calibration hierarchy of an end-user clinical laboratory in vitro diagnostic medical device (IVD-MD). Commutability is a property of a reference material that means results for a reference material and for clinical samples have the same numeric relationship, within specified limits, across the measurement procedures for which the reference material is intended to be used. Procedures for assessing commutability have been described in the literature. This report provides recommendations for establishing a quantitative criterion to assess the commutability of a certified reference material (CRM). The criterion is the maximum allowable noncommutability bias (MANCB) that allows a CRM to be used as a calibrator in a calibration hierarchy for an IVD-MD without exceeding the maximum allowable combined standard uncertainty for a clinical sample result (umaxCS). Consequently, the MANCB is derived as a fraction of the umaxCS for the measurand. The suitability of an MANCB for practical use in a commutability assessment is determined by estimating the number of measurements of clinical samples and CRMs required based on the precision performance and nonselectivity for the measurand of the measurement procedures in the assessment. Guidance is also provided for evaluating indeterminate commutability conclusions and how to report results of a commutability assessment.

OBJECTIVES: The clinical use of soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR) as an iron status indicator is hindered by a lack of assay standardization and common reference ranges and decision thresholds. In 2009, the WHO and National Institute for Biological Standards and Controls (NIBSC) released a sTfR reference material (RM), 07/202, for assay standardization; however, a comprehensive, formal commutability study was not conducted. METHODS: This study evaluated the commutability of WHO 07/202 sTfR RM and human serum pools and the impacts of their use as common calibrators. Commutability was assessed for six different measurement procedures (MPs). Serum pools were prepared according to updated CLSI C37-A procedures (C37) or non-C37 procedures. The study design and analyses were based on Parts 2 and 3 of the 2018 IFCC Commutability in Metrological Traceability Working Group's Recommendations for Commutability Assessment. WHO 07/202 and serum pools were used for instrument/assay and mathematical recalibration, respectively, to determine if their use decreases inter-assay measurement variability for clinical samples. RESULTS: The WHO 07/202 RM dilutions were commutable for all 6 MPs assessed and, when used for instrument calibration, decreased inter-assay variability from 208 to 55.7 %. Non-C37 and C37 serum pools were commutable for all 6 MPs assessed and decreased inter-assay variability from 208 to 13.8 % and 4.6 %, respectively, when used for mathematical recalibration. CONCLUSIONS: All materials evaluated, when used as common calibrators, substantially decreased inter-assay sTfR measurement variability. MP calibration to non-C37 and C37 serum pools may reduce the sTfR IMPBR to a greater extent than WHO 07/202 RM.

BACKGROUND: Medical results generated by European CE Marking for In Vitro Diagnostic or in-house tests should be traceable to higher order reference measurement systems (RMS), such as International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC)-endorsed reference measurement procedures (RMPs) and reference materials. Currently, serum apolipoprotein (a) [apo(a)] is recognized as a novel risk factor for cardiovascular risk assessment and patient management. The former RMS for serum apo(a) is no longer available; consequently, an International System of Units (SI)-traceable, ideally multiplexed, and sustainable RMS for apo(a) is needed. METHODS: A mass spectrometry (MS)-based candidate RMP (cRMP) for apo(a) was developed using quantitative bottom-up proteomics targeting 3 proteotypic peptides. The method was provisionally validated according to ISO 15193 using a single human serum based calibrator traceable to the former WHO-IFCC RMS. RESULTS: The quantitation of serum apo(a) was by design independent of its size polymorphism, was linear from 3.8 to 456 nmol/L, and had a lower limit of quantitation for apo(a) of 3.8 nmol/L using peptide LFLEPTQADIALLK. Interpeptide agreement showed Pearson Rs of 0.987 and 0.984 for peptides GISSTVTGR and TPENYPNAGLTR, and method comparison indicated good correspondence (slopes 0.977, 1.033, and 1.085 for LFLEPTQADIALLK, GISSTVTGR, and TPENYPNAGLTR). Average within-laboratory imprecision of the cRMP was 8.9%, 11.9%, and 12.8% for the 3 peptides. CONCLUSIONS: A robust, antibody-independent, MS-based cRMP was developed as higher order RMP and an essential part of the apo(a) traceability chain and future RMS. The cRMP fulfils predefined analytical performance specifications, making it a promising RMP candidate in an SI-traceable MS-based RMS for apo(a).

BACKGROUND: Elevated concentrations of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are directly related to an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, making it a relevant biomarker for clinical risk assessment. However, the lack of global standardization of current Lp(a) measurement procedures (MPs) leads to inconsistent patient care. The International Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine working group on quantitating apolipoproteins by mass spectrometry (MS) aims to develop a next-generation SI (International system of units)-traceable reference measurement system consisting of a MS-based, peptide-calibrated reference measurement procedure (RMP) and secondary serum-based reference materials (RMs) certified for their apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)] content. To reach measurement standardization through this new measurement system, 2 essential requirements need to be fulfilled: a sufficient correlation among the MPs and appropriate commutability of future serum-based RMs. METHODS: The correlation among the candidate RMP (cRMP) and immunoassay-based MPs was assessed by measuring a panel of 39 clinical samples (CS). In addition, the commutability of 14 different candidate RMs was investigated. RESULTS: Results of the immunoassay-based MPs and the cRMPs demonstrated good linear correlations for the CS but some significant sample-specific differences were also observed. The results of the commutability study show that RMs based on unspiked human serum pools can be commutable with CS, whereas human pools spiked with recombinant apo(a) show different behavior compared to CS. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that unspiked human serum pools are the preferred candidate secondary RMs in the future SI-traceable Lp(a) Reference Measurement System.

Clinical laboratory measurements that are accurate and comparable across measurement systems and over time are critical for patient care and public health systems. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines recommend specific decision points to guide clinical decisions. Electronic health records include patient laboratory data, transferrable across healthcare systems, that inform physicians about a patient’s health history. Laboratory data generated within and across healthcare systems are used to characterize patient populations, identify public health concerns, and track outcomes. Patients access their laboratory results, compare them with publicly available information, and discuss them with healthcare providers. These recent developments have advanced the roles of the clinical laboratory and introduced opportunities for laboratories to provide valuable new information to the patient and the healthcare team. However, these advancements and opportunities require accurate and reliable laboratory measurements. Reliability, in this context, comprises characteristics such as analytical sensitivity, specificity, precision, and consistency over time. Harmonization of laboratory measurement results and standardization, a more specific way of harmonizing results, can help to achieve this. Harmonization creates laboratory measurements that are applicable to practice guidelines, comparable, and interoperable across health systems and over time.

IMPORTANCE: Appropriately established pediatric reference intervals are critical to the clinical decision-making process and should reflect the physiologic changes that occur during healthy child development. Reference intervals used in pediatric care today remain highly inconsistent across a broad range of common clinical biomarkers. OBSERVATIONS: This narrative review assesses biomarker-specific pediatric reference intervals and their clinical utility with respect to the underlying biological changes occurring during development. Pediatric reference intervals from PubMed-indexed articles published from January 2015 to April 2021, commercial laboratory websites, study cohorts, and pediatric reference interval books were all examined. Although large numbers of pediatric reference intervals are published for some biomarkers, very few are used by clinical and commercial laboratories. The patterns, extent, and timing of biomarker changes are highly variable, particularly during developmental stages with rapid physiologic changes. However, many pediatric reference intervals do not capture these changes and thus do not accurately reflect the underlying biochemistry of development, resulting in significant inconsistencies between reference intervals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There is a need to correctly describe the biochemistry of child development as well as to identify strategies to develop accurate and consistent pediatric reference intervals for improved pediatric care.

We conducted a serologic survey in public service agencies in New York City, New York, USA, during May-July 2020 to determine prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among first responders. Of 22,647 participants, 22.5% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Seroprevalence for police and firefighters was similar to overall seroprevalence; seroprevalence was highest in correctional staff (39.2%) and emergency medical technicians (38.3%) and lowest in laboratory technicians (10.1%) and medicolegal death investigators (10.8%). Adjusted analyses demonstrated association between seropositivity and exposure to SARS-CoV-2-positive household members (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.52 [95% CI 3.19-3.87]), non-Hispanic Black race or ethnicity (aOR 1.50 [95% CI 1.33-1.68]), and severe obesity (aOR 1.31 [95% CI 1.05-1.65]). Consistent glove use (aOR 1.19 [95% CI 1.06-1.33]) increased likelihood of seropositivity; use of other personal protective equipment had no association. Infection control measures, including vaccination, should be prioritized for frontline workers.

Healthcare personnel are recognized to be at higher risk for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. We conducted a serologic survey in 15 hospitals and 56 nursing homes across Rhode Island, USA, during July 17-August 28, 2020. Overall seropositivity among 9,863 healthcare personnel was 4.6% (95% CI 4.2%-5.0%) but varied 4-fold between hospital personnel (3.1%, 95% CI 2.7%-3.5%) and nursing home personnel (13.1%, 95% CI 11.5%-14.9%). Within nursing homes, prevalence was highest among personnel working in coronavirus disease units (24.1%; 95% CI 20.6%-27.8%). Adjusted analysis showed that in hospitals, nurses and receptionists/medical assistants had a higher likelihood of seropositivity than physicians. In nursing homes, nursing assistants and social workers/case managers had higher likelihoods of seropositivity than occupational/physical/speech therapists. Nursing home personnel in all occupations had elevated seropositivity compared with hospital counterparts. Additional mitigation strategies are needed to protect nursing home personnel from infection, regardless of occupation.

A SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey among first responder/healthcare personnel showed that loss of taste/smell was most predictive of seropositivity; percent seropositivity increased with number of COVID-19 symptoms. However, 22.9% with nine symptoms were seronegative, and 8.3% with no symptoms were seropositive. These findings demonstrate limitations of symptom-based surveillance and importance of testing.

Despite mitigation efforts, 2 coronavirus disease outbreaks were identified among office workers in Washington, DC. Moderate adherence to workplace mitigation efforts was reported in a serologic survey; activities outside of the workplace were associated with infection. Adherence to safety measures are critical for returning to work during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for validated and standardized severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) quantitative immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralization assays that can be used to understand the immunology and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and support the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic response. METHODS: Literature searches were conducted to identify English language publications from peer-reviewed journals and preprints from January 2020 through November 6, 2020. Relevant publications were reviewed for mention of IgG or neutralization assays for SARS-CoV-2, or both, and the methods of reporting assay results. RESULTS: Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 IgG results have been reported from a limited number of studies; most studies used in-house laboratory-developed tests in limited settings, and only two semiquantitative tests have received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). As of November 6, 2020, there is only one SARS-CoV-2 neutralization assay with FDA EUA. Relatively few studies have attempted correlation of quantitative IgG titers with neutralization results to estimate surrogates of protection. The number of individuals tested is small compared with the magnitude of the pandemic, and persons tested are not representative of disproportionately affected populations. Methods of reporting quantitative results are not standardized to enable comparisons and meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of standardized SARS-CoV-2 quantitative IgG and neutralization assays precludes comparison of results from published studies. Interassay and interlaboratory validation and standardization of assays will support efforts to better understand antibody kinetics and longevity of humoral immune responses postillness, surrogates of immune protection, and vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Public-private partnerships could facilitate realization of these advances in the United States and worldwide.

To estimate seroprevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among healthcare, first response, and public safety personnel, antibody testing was conducted in emergency medical service agencies and 27 hospitals in the Detroit, Michigan, USA, metropolitan area during May-June 2020. Of 16,403 participants, 6.9% had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. In adjusted analyses, seropositivity was associated with exposure to SARS-CoV-2-positive household members (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6.18, 95% CI 4.81-7.93) and working within 15 km of Detroit (aOR 5.60, 95% CI 3.98-7.89). Nurse assistants (aOR 1.88, 95% CI 1.24-2.83) and nurses (aOR 1.52, 95% CI 1.18-1.95) had higher likelihood of seropositivity than physicians. Working in a hospital emergency department increased the likelihood of seropositivity (aOR 1.16, 95% CI 1.002-1.35). Consistently using N95 respirators (aOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.95) and surgical facemasks (aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.98) decreased the likelihood of seropositivity.

IMPORTANCE: Case-based surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection likely underestimates the true prevalence of infections. Large-scale seroprevalence surveys can better estimate infection across many geographic regions. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of persons with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using residual sera from commercial laboratories across the US and assess changes over time. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This repeated, cross-sectional study conducted across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico used a convenience sample of residual serum specimens provided by persons of all ages that were originally submitted for routine screening or clinical management from 2 private clinical commercial laboratories. Samples were obtained during 4 collection periods: July 27 to August 13, August 10 to August 27, August 24 to September 10, and September 7 to September 24, 2020. EXPOSURES: Infection with SARS-CoV-2. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The proportion of persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 as measured by the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 by 1 of 3 chemiluminescent immunoassays. Iterative poststratification was used to adjust seroprevalence estimates to the demographic profile and urbanicity of each jurisdiction. Seroprevalence was estimated by jurisdiction, sex, age group (0-17, 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years), and metropolitan/nonmetropolitan status. RESULTS: Of 177 919 serum samples tested, 103 771 (58.3%) were from women, 26 716 (15.0%) from persons 17 years or younger, 47 513 (26.7%) from persons 65 years or older, and 26 290 (14.8%) from individuals living in nonmetropolitan areas. Jurisdiction-level seroprevalence over 4 collection periods ranged from less than 1% to 23%. In 42 of 49 jurisdictions with sufficient samples to estimate seroprevalence across all periods, fewer than 10% of people had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seroprevalence estimates varied between sexes, across age groups, and between metropolitan/nonmetropolitan areas. Changes from period 1 to 4 were less than 7 percentage points in all jurisdictions and varied across sites. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cross-sectional study found that as of September 2020, most persons in the US did not have serologic evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, although prevalence varied widely by jurisdiction. Biweekly nationwide testing of commercial clinical laboratory sera can play an important role in helping track the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the US.

BACKGROUND: Reports suggest that some persons previously infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lack detectable IgG antibodies. We aimed to determine the proportion IgG seronegative and predictors for seronegativity among persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We analyzed serologic data collected from health care workers and first responders in New York City and the Detroit metropolitan area with history of a positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test result and who were tested for IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein at least 2 weeks after symptom onset. RESULTS: Of 2,547 persons with previous confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 160 (6.3%) were seronegative. Of 2,112 previously symptomatic persons, the proportion seronegative slightly increased from 14 to 90 days post symptom onset (p=0.06). The proportion seronegative ranged from 0% among 79 persons previously hospitalized to 11.0% among 308 persons with asymptomatic infections. In a multivariable model, persons taking immunosuppressive medications were more likely to be seronegative (31.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.7%-64.7%), while participants of non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity (versus non-Hispanic White) (2.7%, 95% CI 1.5%-4.8%), with severe obesity (versus under/normal weight) (3.9%, 95% CI 1.7%-8.6%), or with more symptoms were less likely to be seronegative. CONCLUSIONS: In our population with previous RT-PCR confirmed infection, approximately one in 16 persons lacked IgG antibodies. Absence of antibodies varied independently by illness severity, race/ethnicity, obesity, and immunosuppressive drug therapy. The proportion seronegative remained relatively stable among persons tested up to 90 days post symptom onset.

The development, validation, and appropriate application of serological assays to detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are essential to determining seroprevalence of this virus in the United States and globally and in guiding government leadership and the private sector on back-to-work policies. An interagency working group of the US Department of Health and Human Services convened a virtual workshop to identify knowledge gaps and key outstanding scientific issues and to develop strategies to fill them. Key outcomes of the workshop included recommendations for (1) advancing serology assays as a tool to better understand SARS-CoV-2 infection and (2) conducting crucial serology field studies to advance an understanding of immunity to SARS-CoV-2, leading to protection and duration of protection, including the correlation between serological test results and risk of reinfection.

Iron overload (hemochromatosis) can cause serious, symptomatic disease that is preventable if detected early and managed appropriately. The leading cause of hemochromatosis in populations of predominantly European ancestry is homozygosity of the C282Y variant in the HFE gene. Screening of adults for iron overload or associated genotypes is controversial, largely because of a belief that severe phenotypes are uncommon, although cascade testing of first-degree relatives of patients is widely endorsed. We contend that severe liver disease (cirrhosis or hepatocellular cancer) is not at all uncommon among older males with hereditary hemochromatosis. Our review of the published data from a variety of empirical sources indicates that roughly 1 in 10 male HFE C282Y homozygotes is likely to develop severe liver disease during his lifetime unless iron overload is detected early and treated. New evidence from a randomized controlled trial of treatment allows for evidence-based management of presymptomatic patients. Although population screening for HFE C282Y homozygosity faces multiple barriers, a potentially effective strategy for increasing the early detection and prevention of clinical iron overload and severe disease is to include HFE C282Y homozygosity in lists of medically actionable gene variants when reporting the results of genome or exome sequencing.

BACKGROUND: The Next Generation (NexGen) of Risk Assessment effort is a multiyear collaboration among several organizations evaluating new, potentially more efficient molecular, computational and systems biology approaches to risk assessment. This paper summarizes our findings, suggests applications to risk assessment, and identifies strategic research directions. OBJECTIVE: Our specific objectives were to test whether advanced biological data and methods could better inform our understanding of public health risks posed by environmental exposures. METHODS: New data and methods were applied and evaluated for use in hazard identification and dose-response assessment. Biomarkers of exposure and effect, and risk characterization were also examined. Consideration was given to various decision contexts with increasing regulatory and public health impacts. Data types included transcriptomics, genomics, and proteomics; methods included molecular epidemiology and clinical studies, bioinformatic knowledge mining, pathway and network analyses, short-duration in vivo and in vitro bioassays, and quantitative structure activity relationship modeling. DISCUSSION: NexGen has advanced our ability to apply new science by more rapidly identifying chemicals and exposures of potential concern, helping characterize mechanisms of action that influence conclusions about causality, exposure-response relationships, susceptibility and cumulative risk, and by elucidating new biomarkers of exposure and effects. Additionally, NexGen has fostered extensive discussion among risk scientists and managers and improved confidence in interpreting and applying new data streams. CONCLUSIONS: While considerable uncertainties remain, thoughtful application of new knowledge to risk assessment appears reasonable for augmenting major scope assessments, forming the basis for or augmenting limited scope assessments, and for prioritization and screening of very data limited chemicals.

With nearly 4000 cases of West Nile virus reported to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as of early October, more than 5 times the number of cases reported in 2011, the 2012 West Nile virus season has been one of the worst since the virus emerged in the United States in 1999. | This surge in cases—which was concentrated in Texas, Mississippi, Michigan, South Dakota, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and California—likely resulted from a confluence of ecological factors, including higher-than-normal temperatures, that may have influenced mosquito and bird abundance, the replication of the virus in its host mosquitoes, and interactions of birds and mosquitoes in hard-hit areas, according to Lyle Petersen, MD, MPH, Director of the CDC's Division of Vector-Borne Diseases. Petersen discussed this year's resurgence of West Nile virus with JAMA.